Sovereign? It is wronging their memory to think it. They would turn to other means, they would employ other principles. Their hidden strength, fasting, and prayer, and almsgiving, would be the same; but its manifestations would be widely other. It has grown into a common phrase, to speak of the immutable Oriental Church. The epithet is true. Yet this immutable Communion has, in some cases, adapted itself with greater pliability to the wants of the age than her sister of the West. For example: it was evidently preposterous that, after the capture of Constantinople, the Patriarch of that city should be charged with the spiritual guidance of All the Russias. Removeable at the will of the Sultan, the natural enemy of the Czar, the position was evidently a false one; and was felt to be so. Constantinople therefore resigned her rights;—and was the first among the Patriarchates to erect Moscow into a Patriarchal Throne. Another instance of adaptation was at the discovery of printing. It must have been evident from the first that the common people would avail themselves of the new invention it must have been clear that they would wish, and they were not to be blamed for wishing, to read the Bible in their own tongue. The Western Church attempted to crush this spirit of inquiry. Instead of giving the various nations of her jurisdiction a vernacular Bible, taking care that the translation should be orthodox, and that difficult passages should be fenced with notes, she resolutely denied the Scriptures to the common people. We verily believe that the motive was good; but it was a striking instance of a want of that tact which earlier Rome so wonderfully possessed. At last the boon was wrung from her; and no gratitude was felt for that which was granted, because it could no longer be denied. The Eastern Church, on the contrary, has rather encouraged the circulation of the Holy Scriptures; taking care, of course, to claim to herself the office of interpreter. And we are not aware that a single heresy has been the consequence. If any These remarks may serve to render our meaning clearer. one were now gravely to assure us that, in order to restore the influence which the Primitive and Mediæval Church possessed, it would be necessary to revert to the primitive and mediæval state of science and instruction, to suppress education among the poor, to put a stop to railroads, to discourage frequent intercommunication between different peoples, we should at once feel that the thing could not be done. So when an Ultra-montane informs us that the regeneration of the Church can only be effected on the Hildebrandine theory, we are obliged to reply,-The theory had its day, but that day is past. It is physically impossible that it ever can return. It looks beautiful; but that is all. The more beautiful it looks, the more we are bound to receive it with suspicion; because, à priori, a theory suited for feudal times will be unsuitable for these. Now, on the other hand, if any one objects that the Patriarchal system is so broken up, so utterly out of joint, so geographically impossible, that it is madness to hope its restoration, we answer, What other could be expected? how can it be that the details which held good in the ninth century should hold good in the nineteenth? To imagine that, to the end of time, there can be but five Patriarchal Thrones, or that they must be fixed in precisely the same cities as they have hitherto been, is simply absurd. We may easily conceive a different division. We may conceive seven Patriarchates: -Rome, the Patriarchal See of Europe; Jerusalem, of Asia west of the Indus and Yenisee; Calcutta, of Eastern Asia; Alexandria, of Africa; Sydney, of Polynesia; Baltimore, of North, Rio de Janeiro, of South America. Such a division would be in accordance with the spirit of the Patriarchal system: while, to retain its letter is necessarily to contradict its principle. In fact, it is not too much to say, that on the principle of simply national Churches, the Church Catholic could not be in union. Those who point to the partial working of this system in former ages, entirely forget that there were no such things as colonies at that period. How monstrous, for instance, would it be, that, were the Church at union, the Bishop of Bombay should have no jurisdiction over the neighbouring Clergy of Damaun, because it is a Portuguese colony! How monstrous it is that cases arising in Sydney should be referred to the jurisdiction of the Archbishop of Canterbury! There cannot be Colonial Churches. Ecclesiastical jurisdiction must be local, and cannot now be national. When it was national, it was so because that was but another term for being local. The wildest doctrine of appeals to Rome would not be so wild as (were it carried out,) that of reference from Sydney to Canterbury. These reflections arise naturally from the perusal of Father Pereira's work,-which we heartily commend to our readers. With one eloquent passage from it we shall conclude; merely thanking Mr. Landon for putting it within the reach of the English Church. "It is indeed a source of deep sorrow, when our LORD CHRIST ordained all His Apostles in this form,- As My FATHER hath sent Me, so send I you, go ye, teach, preach, and baptize,'-to see one Peter de Palude arise, thirteen centuries after, to teach that Peter alone received jurisdiction immediately from CHRIST, and to find Cardinal de Torquemada afterwards adopting the doctrine; and Bellarmine calling Palude's work, a wonderful treatise.' "And it is not less scandalous, since the Church is according to the teaching of the HOLY SPIRIT, the Bride of CHRIST;' (this is a great mystery, but I speak concerning CHRIST and the Church') * This whole theory, it will be seen, implies our reconciliation with Rome, as it does the renunciation on her part of the claim of Universal Supremacy; which would make reconciliation easy. since the same Church, according to S. Augustine, is a Sovereign Queen,' according to Tertullian, our Mother and Mistress,' and which is more, since She is the Sovereign Arbitress, before whose Tribunal CHRIST commanded Peter to impeach the incorrigible, ('if he will not hear thee tell it to the Church,')-since the Church is such, it is, I say, not less scandalous to hear in these latter days a Cardinal Cajetan endeavour to prove that with respect to the Pope, the Church is a slave a born slave-' Ecclesia serva nata Romani Principis:' and these are the works which are in repute at Rome. We do not find these amongst the list of prohibited books; these are the volumes which form the Bibliotheca Maxima Pontificia of the illustrious Rocaberti, a work which I might with more propriety designate, The Repository of the Opinions of the Roman Court.' CHRIST OUR LORD clearly gives us to understand by S. Luke, that the government of His Church ought to be very different from that of the Monarchies and Republics of this world; the Kings of the Gentiles exercise lordship over them, BUT IT SHALL NOT BE SO WITH YOU.' There is no commoner doctrine with the Holy Fathers; yet how few there are, in or out of the Roman Court, who do not assent to the opinion that the Pope holds the same position with regard to any ecclesiastic, that a secular Prince does with regard to his subjects; that with respect to the Bishops, he is as a King with respect to his magistrates; that as a King can at his will limit or restrain the jurisdiction of his Senators, so can the Pope, at his will, limit and restrain the jurisdiction of the Bishops; that as a King in temporal matter recognizes no superior save GoD, so the Pope, in all matters relating to the government of the Church, is as much a Sovereign, as absolute, as despotic, that, as says the gloss on Cap. Quanto personam, de translatione Episcopi, no one can say to him, why dost thou so?' A gloss, which Gerson calls the deadly poison of the ancient flattery,' and in another place, a monstrous and horrible stumbling-block, placed by flattery in the way of the Word of God.' Whence doubtless it arose, that the Bishops found themselves in Gerson's time reduced to the condition of painted images,' or, as the Spanish Bishops complained at the Council of Trent, reduced to nothing.' "Who then would not mourn over such a corruption of ideas? who would not feel for such a depreciation of the Episcopal Order, such a breach in the Ecclesiastical Hierarchy, over sentiments so opposed to antiquity? Only one who is altogether a stranger to antiquity, who knows nothing of the Holy Fathers." 254 LAYS FOR THE MINOR FESTIVALS OF THE ENGLISH CHURCH.* I. MAY 3.-INVENTION OF THE CROSS.-A.d. 326. S. HELENA, widow of the Emperor Constantius Chlorus, and mother of Constantine the Great, was seized with an anxious desire to recover the Holy Cross, and to remove the Heathen temples which had been built on the scene of the Crucifixion of our Blessed LORD. Having discovered the probable spot where, as the custom was, the Cross had been buried, she had the buildings razed, and the ground carefully excavated. The Sepulchre was at length reached, and near it three crosses were found, one of which lay apart from the others. This was the Cross upon which our SAVIOUR suffered. Why solemn with her thoughtful tread Bend lowly downward to the earth? To eyes less pure, less sanctified- Those broken columns tell the tale Impure, unholy, Deities Usurp the throne of Israel's GOD; * The series will be continued monthly. "Twas here that fierce Ingratitude That tree once cursed, but cursed no more, Since in His own dread hour it bore The Form that gained the Victory o'er the grave. He took its curse away, and made The dazzling Infinite of love, How the dread Son vouchsafed to prove Oh blessed Cross! no more death's sign, Purchased through thee by Love divine; Made glorious by th' all-glorious Name, And hung with festal crowns a ransom and release. |